Importance: Survivors of breast cancer present more severe symptoms of genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM) than patients without history of breast cancer. Recently, new treatments, such as vaginal laser therapy, have appeared, but evidence of their efficacy remains scarce.Objective: To assess the safety and efficacy of carbon dioxide (CO₂) vs sham vaginal laser therapy after 6 months of follow-up in survivors of breast cancer with GSM receiving aromatase inhibitors.Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective double-blind sham-controlled randomized clinical trial with two parallel study groups was performed during October 2020 to March 2022 in a tertiary referral hospital. Survivors of breast cancer using aromatase inhibitors were assessed for eligibility, and eligible patients were randomized into the 2 treatment groups. Follow-up was conducted at 6 months. Data were analyzed in July 2022.Interventions: All patients from both groups were instructed to use the first-line treatment (FLT) based on nonhormonal moisturizers and vaginal vibrator stimulation. Patients for each group were allocated to 5 monthly sessions of fractional CO₂ laser therapy (CLT) or sham laser therapy (SLT).Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was sexual function, evaluated through Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) score. Other subjective measures of efficacy included a visual analog scale of dyspareunia, vaginal pH, a Vaginal Health Index, quality of life (assessed via Short-Form 12), and body image (assessed with the Spanish Body Image Scale). Objective measures of efficacy included vaginal maturation index, vaginal epithelial elasticity (measured in Pascals) and vaginal epithelial thickness (measured in millimeters). Measures were assessed before and after the intervention. Tolerance (measured on a Likert scale), adverse effects, and estradiol levels were recorded.Results: Among 211 survivors of breast cancer assessed, 84 women were deemed eligible and 72 women (mean [SD] age, 52.6 [8.3] years) were randomized to CLT (35 participants) or SLT (37 participants) and analyzed. There were no statistically significant differences between groups at baseline. At 6 months, both groups showed improvement in FSFI (mean [SD] score at baseline vs 6 months: CLT, 14.8 [8.8] points vs 20.0 [9.5] points; SLT, 15.6 [7.0] points vs 23.5 [6.5] points), but there was no significant difference between CLT and SLT groups in the improvement of sexual function evaluated through the FSFI test overall (mean [SD] difference, 5.2 [1.5] points vs 7.9 [1.2] points; P = .15) or after excluding women who were not sexually active (mean [SD] difference, 2.9 [1.4] points vs 5.5 [1.1] points; P = .15). There were also no differences between improvement of the 2 groups at 6 months of follow-up in the other assessed subjective outcomes, including dyspareunia (mean [SD] difference, −4.3 [3.4] vs −4.5 [2.3]; P = .73), Vaginal Health Index (mean [SD] difference, 3.3 [4.1] vs 5.0 [4.5]; P = .17), body image (mean [SD] difference, −3.7 [4.5] vs −2.7 [4.8]; P = .35), and quality of life (mean [SD] difference, −0.3 [3.6] vs −0.7 [3.2]; P = .39). Similarly, there were no differences in improvements in objective outcomes, including vaginal pH (mean [SD] difference, −0.6 [0.9] vs −0.8 [1.2]; P = .29), vaginal maturation index (mean [SD] difference, 10.2 [17.4] vs 14.4 [17.1]; P = .15), vaginal epithelial thickness (mean [SD] difference, 0.021 [0.014] mm vs 0.013 [0.012] mm; P = .30), vaginal epithelial elasticity (mean [SD] difference, −1373 [3197] Pascals vs −2103 [3771] Pascals; P = .64). There were significant improvements in the overall analysis regardless of group in many outcomes. The 2 interventions were well tolerated, but tolerance was significantly lower in the CLT group than the SLT group (mean [SD] Likert scale score, 3.3 [1.3] vs 4.1 [1.0]; P = .007). No differences were observed in complications or serum estradiol levels.Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, vaginal laser treatment was found to be safe after 6 months of follow-up, but no statistically significant differences in efficacy were observed between CLT and SLT.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04619485

Background: Breast cancer (BC) is the most prevalent cancer among females worldwide. Despite having survival rates beyond 90% in 5 years nowadays, BC has also the highest rates of lost disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) among all cancers. Sexual dysfunction (SD) is one of the most important causes of the problem, affecting between 40–80% of BC survivors. However, SD remains underdiagnosed and undertreated in the clinical practice. Therefore, this review is aimed to evaluate the assessment of SD in Breast Cancer Survivors (BCS) as well as specific causes affecting their sexual function and the potential therapeutic options for these patients. Methods: In December 2021, a search of observational studies evaluating the sexual function in BCS was performed through Ovid Medline, Embase, PubMed, Cochrane register of controlled trials (CCTR), Cochrane database of systematic reviews (CDSR), Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and Google scholar to identify potentially relevant publications. Articles that evaluated non-gynecological cancers were excluded, as well as those focusing on the sexuality of men. Results: Despite being such a prevalent entity and given the particularities of how BC affects the sexuality of patients, SD is not usually discussed in the clinical practice in BCS for various reasons, remaining therefore underdiagnosed and undertreated. SD in BC patients has a multifactorial aetiology, including among others, the effect of BC treatments (related to vaginal mucosae, fatigue, and joint pain), the psychological impact of the diagnostic itself and sociocultural influences related to the alteration of the breast. Various strategies have been suggested to treat SD in BC patients, including pharmacological, physical and psychological options. Evidence shows that vaginal moisturizers and psyco-educational therapies focusing on sexual health and couple-based ones improve sexual function; while systemic treatments and general psychological therapy have not demonstrated benefit. Regarding exercise programmes, body image perception has shown to be improved after a one-year strength training program. Conclusions: SD is a multifactorial condition that affects the quality of life of millions of BCS worldwide, severely underdiagnosed and undertreated up to date. A systematic assessment of sexual function in BCS could be useful to diagnose all cases prematurely to give adequate care and prevent its worsening. Specific treatment options for BCS are key potential investigation targets for the near future.

Background and Objective: De-escalation in breast cancer surgery has been a natural evolution since breast conserving surgery (BCS) was introduced in the early 1980s. From Halsted mastectomies to wide local excisions, we are facing nowadays the next trend in form of oncoplastic breast surgery. Oncoplastic breast surgery combines oncological principles with plastic surgery techniques to preserve the breast shape and appearance. The aim of this work is to review recent oncological and quality of live outcomes derived from oncoplastic techniques as well as offer a perspective about its implementation in breast cancer units. Methods: A literature review was conducted to explore the landscape of oncoplastic breast surgery. Key terms related to oncoplastic techniques and breast cancer were used in searches across databases such as PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library. Inclusion criteria focused on recent articles discussing oncological and quality of life (QoL) outcomes, as well as perspectives on the role of oncoplastic surgery. Key Content and Findings: The research aims to contribute valuable insights into the efficacy and impact of oncoplastic surgery in the context of breast cancer treatment. In this new era of precision medicine, it is more than just healing patients; it is about improving their well-being. We ought to consider specific oncoplasty role in leading this paradigm shift. It is also relevant to define whether these new technical-demanding surgical options can be applied to all patients and if professional training performs adequately to current demands of personalized treatments. Conclusions: The global adoption of oncoplastic BCS is recommended due to its oncological safety and improvement in QoL compared to standard procedures. Emphasizing the need for skilled surgeons in complex cases, collaboration between breast surgeons and scientific societies is urged to certify ongoing educational training in oncoplastic techniques.

Many breast cancer survivors (BCS) suffer the consequences of antineoplastic treatments that induce a hypoestrogenic state, leading to chronic climacteric symptoms such as genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM), arousing significant alteration in their quality of life. Non-hormonal therapies (NHT) are first-line treatments, safe but with mild efficacy. When facing moderate–severe GSM, the options for BCS are limited: local estrogen therapy, considered the ‘gold standard’ but with concerns about safety; vaginal androgens and prasterone, which seem to trigger an activation of estrogen and androgen receptors of the vaginal epithelium layers, without activating estrogen receptors on other tissues, being potentially safe but still without strong evidence in favor of BCS; vaginal lasers, which appear to improve vascularization of vaginal mucosa by stimulating the remodeling of the underlying connective tissue, but with contradictory results of efficacy in recent randomized clinical trials; and ospemifene, an oral selective estrogen receptor modulator presenting mild vaginal estrogenic potency and anti-estrogenic effect at the endometrial and breast level, but still not recommended for use in BCS in recent North American Menopause Society guidelines. There is a need for further studies evaluating objectively the efficacy and safety of these promising therapeutic options. On the other hand, sexuality must be seen as a multifactorial issue, where GSM is only part of the problem; evidence shows that sexual counseling improves the quality of life of BCS. Finally, there is a need to limit the underdiagnosis and undertreatment of GSM in BCS; the primary goal of physicians treating BCS regarding this issue has to be the provision of information of what to expect regarding genital and sexual symptoms to BCS and to counsel on early first-line treatments that may help prevent more severe GSM.